Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Predicting Prostate Biopsy Findings in Patients Considered for Active Surveillance of Clinically Low Risk Prostate Cancer
- 1 November 2012
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) in Journal of Urology
- Vol. 188 (5), 1732-1738
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.07.024
Abstract
Purpose: A barrier to the acceptance of active surveillance for men with prostate cancer is the risk of underestimating the cancer burden on initial biopsy. We assessed the value of endorectal magnetic resonance imaging in predicting upgrading on confirmatory biopsy in men with low risk prostate cancer. Materials and Methods: A total of 388 consecutive men (mean age 60.6 years, range 33 to 89) with clinically low risk prostate cancer (initial biopsy Gleason score 6 or less, prostate specific antigen less than 10 ng/ml, clinical stage T2a or less) underwent endorectal magnetic resonance imaging before confirmatory biopsy. Three radiologists independently and retrospectively scored tumor visibility on endorectal magnetic resonance imaging using a 5-point scale (1—definitely no tumor to 5—definitely tumor). Inter-reader agreement was assessed with weighted kappa statistics. Associations between magnetic resonance imaging scores and confirmatory biopsy findings were evaluated using measures of diagnostic performance and multivariate logistic regression. Results: On confirmatory biopsy, Gleason score was upgraded in 79 of 388 (20%) patients. Magnetic resonance imaging scores of 2 or less had a high negative predictive value (0.96–1.0) and specificity (0.95–1.0) for upgrading on confirmatory biopsy. A magnetic resonance imaging score of 5 was highly sensitive for upgrading on confirmatory biopsy (0.87–0.98). At multivariate analysis patients with higher magnetic resonance imaging scores were more likely to have disease upgraded on confirmatory biopsy (odds ratio 2.16–3.97). Inter-reader agreement and diagnostic performance were higher for the more experienced readers (kappa 0.41–0.61, AUC 0.76–0.79) than for the least experienced reader (kappa 0.15–0.39, AUC 0.61–0.69). Magnetic resonance imaging performed similarly in predicting low risk and very low risk (Gleason score 6, less than 3 positive cores, less than 50% involvement in all cores) prostate cancer. Conclusions: Adding endorectal magnetic resonance imaging to the initial clinical evaluation of men with clinically low risk prostate cancer helps predict findings on confirmatory biopsy and assess eligibility for active surveillance.Keywords
This publication has 26 references indexed in Scilit:
- Impact of Multiparametric Endorectal Coil Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging on Disease Reclassification Among Active Surveillance Candidates: A Prospective Cohort StudyJournal of Urology, 2012
- Diffusion-weighted Endorectal MR Imaging at 3 T for Prostate Cancer: Tumor Detection and Assessment of AggressivenessRadiology, 2011
- The Contemporary Concept of Significant Versus Insignificant Prostate CancerEuropean Urology, 2011
- Magnetic resonance imaging does not improve the prediction of misclassification of prostate cancer patients eligible for active surveillance when the most stringent selection criteria are based on the saturation biopsy schemeBJU International, 2010
- Declining Death Rates Reflect Progress against CancerPLOS ONE, 2010
- Clinical Stage T1c Prostate Cancer: Evaluation with Endorectal MR Imaging and MR Spectroscopic ImagingRadiology, 2009
- Lead Time and Overdiagnosis in Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening: Importance of Methods and ContextJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2009
- Pathological Upgrading and Up Staging With Immediate Repeat Biopsy in Patients Eligible for Active SurveillanceJournal of Urology, 2008
- Prospective Evaluation of Selection Criteria for Active Surveillance in Japanese Patients with Stage T1cN0M0 Prostate CancerJapanese Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2008
- Large sample standard errors of kappa and weighted kappa.Psychological Bulletin, 1969